IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SHRAYANSH JAIN – Appellant
Versus
M/S ALGEBRA CONSTRUCTION & ORS – Respondent
##PAGE1##
CR-9095-2025 (O&M) 1
127 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR-9095-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision : 05.02.2026
SHRAYANSH JAIN ....Petitioner
Versus
M/S ALGEBRA CONSTRUCTION & ORS ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. Vilas Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Present revision petition is directed against order dated
07.07.2025 passed by Commercial Court whereby the application filed by
the petitioner, under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, seeking deletion of his name
from the array of parties, has been dismissed.
2. Petitioner has been arraigned as defendant No.5 in a suit for
specific performance filed by plaintiff/respondent. An application was
moved by the petitioner/defendant No.5 seeking deletion of his name. As
per the petitioner, he is neither a party to the collaboration agreement
propounded by the plaintiff nor has acted in his personal capacity. Thus, he
can neither be claimed to be a necessary nor proper party.
DEEPAK KUMAR
2026.02.09 09:41
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
##PAGE2##CR-9095-2025 (O&M) 2
3. The application was opposed by the plaintiff asserting that
defendant No.5 is necessary and proper party being director of defendant
No.1 and his presence is necessary for proper adjudication of the suit.
4. Application filed by the plaintiff stands dismissed by the Trial
Court referring to the specific allegations levelled in the plaint.
5. Counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order passed by the
Commercial Court. He asserts that the plaint is totally bereft of any
allegation levelled against defendant No.5 in person. Defendant No.5, the
petitioner having acted only as a Director of the company is neither
necessary nor proper party for adjudication of the matter in hand and thus he
cannot be allowed to face the ordeal of trial.
6. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and have gone through
records of the case.
7. The argument raised by counsel for the petitioner w.r.t. there
being no allegation levelled against the petitioner, is against the record and is
misconceived. Reference can be made to the pleadings raised in Para No.12,
17, 18, 19 & 20 of the plaint wherein the grievance of the plaintiff is w.r.t.
actions taken by defendant No.5 in person and qua his interference in
construction.
8. It is true that Order I Rule 10 CPC is an exception to the
principle of dominus litis and the plaintiff cannot be allowed to implead
DEEPAK KUMAR
2026.02.09 09:41
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
##PAGE3##CR-9095-2025 (O&M) 3
someone unnecessarily. However, the plaintiff is well within his right to
implead a party which is necessary and proper for the adjudication of the lis.
9. The test to ascertain the necessary and proper party has been
laid down by Five Judges Bench of Supreme Court in the case of U.P. Awas
Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Gyam Devi (dead) by L.Rs. (1995) 2 SCC 326
observing as under:
“22. xxx xxx xxx That raises the question whether the local
authority can be regarded as a necessary or a proper party. The law
is well settled that a necessary party is one without whom no order
can be made effectively and a proper party is one in whose absence
an effective order can be made but whose presence is necessary for
a complete and final decision of the question involved in the
proceeding. (See: Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia v. Additional
Member, Board of Revenue, [1963] Supp. 1 SCR 676, at p. 681.
(emphasis supplied)
10. Applying the aforesaid ratio, this Court finds that even if the
plea raised by the petitioner w.r.t. him not being a necessary party is
accepted, it cannot be held that he is not a proper party.
11. In view of above, finding no merit in the present revision
petition, the same is ordered to be dismissed.
12. Pending application, if any, shall also stands disposed off.
February 05, 2026 (Pankaj Jain)
Dpr Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
DEEPAK KUMAR
2026.02.09 09:41
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.